Winning the Obesity Battle

Winning the Obesity Battl

Reducing and eliminating health disparities through prevention and public health

N/

Reducing Disparities by way of a Cancer Disparities Research Training Program

Background: For minority populations, there is a continuing disparity in the burden of death and illness from cancer. Research to address this disparity should be conducted by investigators who can best understand and address the needs of culturally diverse communities. However, minorities are under-represented in health-related research. The goal of this project was to develop and evaluate an approach to motivating and preparing master’s degree students for careers dedicated to cancer disparities research. Method: A Cancer Disparities Research Training Program (CDRTP) was initiated in 2010. The program consists of coursework, practicum experiences, and research opportunities. Assessment of the curriculum is based on monitoring achievement of evaluation indicators and includes a quantitative assessment and qualitative approach. Results: In its first three years, the program graduated 20 trainees, all of whom were minorities (18 African Americans and two Asians). When asked about career goals, two-thirds of the trainees indicated interest in pursuing careers in research on cancer prevention and control. The trainees expressed high satisfaction with the courses, instructor, materials, and curriculum. Although trainees had suggestions about course details, evaluations overall were positive. Across focus groups, three recurrent themes emerged regarding activities to enhance the student experience: having a wider variety of topics, more guest speakers, and field trips. Conclusion: The CDRTP was intended to recruit students – primarily African Americans – into research on prevention and control of cancer disparities. Although final evaluation of the program’s overall outcome will not be available for several years, a preliminary evaluation indicates the program is being successful

Integrating research with NHS clinical practice: Unwelcome intrusion or constructive triangulation?

When embarking on research into the effectiveness of psychoanalytic psychotherapy in the NHS or the application of psychoanalytic principles, researchers come up against a number of hurdles: many clinicians still see empirical research as antithetical or disruptive to the practice of psychoanalytic psychotherapy; psychoanalytic psychotherapy has previously fared poorly in evidence-based policy guidelines and this can discourage ambition, and there are technical problems of research design, measurement and standardization. Nevertheless, in a political climate which stresses service evaluation, measurable outcomes and empirical evidence, psychoanalytic psychotherapy must participate to survive. There may be gains from conducting research beyond simply meeting the requirement to provide evidence of effectiveness. Research may be viewed by some clinicians as an unwelcome intruder but it may have the potential to offer triangulation, the perspective of the 'third', and so strengthen the foundations of clinical practice and the development of psychoanalytic thought

Ambivalence

The phenomenon of ambivalence is an important one for any philosophy of action. Despite this importance, there is a lack of a fully satisfactory analysis of the phenomenon. Although many contemporary philosophers recognize the phenomenon, and address topics related to it, only Harry Frankfurt has given the phenomenon full treatment in the context of action theory - providing an analysis of how it relates to the structure and freedom of the will. In this paper, I develop objections to Frankfurt's account, all revolving around the charge that his account contains a serious ambiguity between willing and identifying. With such objections in place, I then develop an analysis that avoids the difficulties and ambiguities that Frankfurt's analysis is prey to. I briefly distinguish ambivalence from other types of internal conflict. This paper aims to offer conceptual clarification on the phenomenon of ambivalence, which will then allow for discussions about the normative merits and demerits of ambivalence, the effects of ambivalence on autonomous action, and methods of resolution of ambivalenc

Two Types of Autonomy

Although I agree with Sabine Muller’s conclusion that we should first seek to find alternatives to amputation for patients suffering from Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID), I disagree with one of the major premises that she uses to argue for her claim. Muller argues that patients with BIID are likely not autonomous when they request that the limb be amputated. Muller’s argument that BIID suffers are not autonomous is flawed because she conflates philosophical conceptions of autonomy with the conception of autonomy that is operative in the context of medicine

Sedation and regional anaesthesia in the adult patient

This review discusses sedation for regional anaesthesia in the adult population. The first section deals with general aspects of sedation and shows that the majority of patients receiving sedation for regional anaesthesia are satisfied and would choose it again. Methods of assessing the level of sedation are discussed with emphasis on clinical measures. The pharmacology of the drugs involved in sedation is discussed, with propofol and remifentanil appearing to be the combination of choice for sedation in regional anaesthesia. The techniques for administering sedation are discussed and replacement of the traditional repeated boluses or continuous infusion with pharmacokinetic and patient-controlled systems is supported. Patient satisfaction studies suggest that patient-controlled systems are preferre

The End-to-End Argument and Application Design: The Role of Trust

Symposium: Rough Consensus and Running Code: Integrating Engineering Principles into Internet Policy Debates, held at the University of Pennsylvania\u27s Center for Technology Innovation and Competition on May 6-7, 2010. Policy debates about the evolution of the Internet show varying degrees of understanding about the underlying technology. A fundamental principle of the design of the Internet, from the early 1980s, is the so-called end-to-end argument articulated in a seminal technical paper. Intended to provide guidance for what kind of capability is built into a network as opposed to the devices that use the network, the end-to-end argument has been invoked in discussions about freedom, neutrality, and other qualities that may be associated with the supply and use of the Internet and with related public policy. This Article builds on the technical discussions of end-to-end to address the design of applications that use the Internet. It explores the role of trust as a factor in decisions about the structure of applications and their interaction with the Internet as part of a larger system